Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/07/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> > I wish!! But it's $3,795.00!! And unavailable at B&H :-( My husband > (and financial manager) would kill me. Tina On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com>wrote: > Tina of course it depends on just how close you want to go. Going down to > a > smaller sensor size also has the effect in practice of increasing the DoF > as > you would know. > I encourage you to look at the the Macro Elmar 90. The quality is certainly > there and it is by far the most compact solution to add to your bag too. > Framing is very accurate with and without the adapter. At closest focus it > covers about 6 inches by 9 inches and with the macro adapter down to 2.8 > inches x 4.25 inches. Compromising only by a crop to equivalent from an M8 > you get smaller fields again but still all of the quality you could wish > for > stock or print to that camera's standards too. Tht gives you some > compositional leeway too naturally. > The working distance is greater than a true macro too, of course. > As a bonus it is a fine portrait lens or compact short tele. In rendering > it > is different in character to the ASPH. designs for those applications but > still plenty of sharpness obtainable. > > You may have seen this a little while ago. This version is at 100% for web > viewing but you can see the detail and quality I'm sure. > > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/124448398 > Cheers > Geoff > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > > > On 15 July 2010 08:56, Tina Manley <images at comporium.net> wrote: > > > I do still have my Canon 5D and 1DMII, with macro lenses, but I've been > > spoiled by carrying around the M9. Those Canons seem huge! My daughter > is > > using the 5D and making a little extra money shooting weddings and > babies. > > I'd hate to take it back from her. I've been impressed with the quality > > of > > some of the macro photos posted but they are web photos. I guess I need > to > > look at big prints, too. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Tina > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > LUG: > > > > > > > > The M8 and M9 are not the best choices for macro photography, even > with > > > the > > > > Visoflex. I've been looking for a cheap alternative to carry along > > just > > > for > > > > macro. Somebody on one of my stock lists uses this combination: > > > G9/Olympus > > > > B-Macro doublet (f=40cm) I assume that means the Canon G9, but what > > lens > > > is > > > > that? I can't find it with Google. > > > > > > > > Any other recommendations? > > > > > > > > TIA > > > > > > > > Tina > > > > > > > > > It is much much earlier to shoot macro with each successive smaller > > format; > > > A Canon G9 gives you a normal lens or diagonal of 9.50 mm's!!! > > > So that's several formats down from all the other stuff you are > shooting. > > > So you'd measure your approach and use of your macro stuff vs. your > > regular > > > stuff. > > > If it was me I'd want them to be the same quality of my other work; if > > not > > > better. So I'd not go down all those formats to shoot it but try to > match > > > it. .. macro is a mixed and difficult bag so I'd ask what exactly are > you > > > shooting how close and used for what. > > > I'd advise putting a Canon macro lens on a full frame canon camrea as I > > > think you've got one of those bodies already. If you sold them I'd buy > > one > > > back again. > > > All kinds of compact and big and expensive Macro glass Canon options. > > > One thing catching my eye is the > > > Canon Macro Photo MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Manual Focus Lens for EOS which > > cost > > > just under grand at B&H. > > > If it was me I'd have this with me for hen I needed to get closer than > > > what > > > the M system is good for. > > > The M system though is underestimated for how close it can easy go. > > > I forgot which lens gives me the smallest magnification it may be the > 135 > > > 3.4 APO. I think you can shoot a 5x7 with those. A 90 would be > certainly > > ok > > > certainly with the macro thing the macro 90. > > > And if I was wanting smaller stuff than that id use a DSLR with > hopefully > > a > > > full frame sensor but maybe a 1.5 or close to it crop circle. Depending > > on > > > use. > > > > > > Canon has a compact 50 a nice 60 and a bigish 100. > > > And using a zoom in the macro rehelm can be under estimated. > > > They seem to have those options as well. > > > But it would seem you want it to be very compact. > > > Then I'd get a Rebel 1.5 body with a compact macro on the front of it. > > > There is something to be said for a cheap, lightweight, compact 1.5 > crop > > > DSLR. > > > I use them everyday. > > > > > > [Rabs] > > > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Tina Manley, ASMP > > www.tinamanley.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > -- Tina Manley, ASMP www.tinamanley.com